Dataset Information

Heart failure with recovered ejection fraction: clinical description, biomarkers, and outcomes.

ABSTRACT: We hypothesized that patients with heart failure (HF) who recover left ventricular function (HF-Recovered) have a distinct clinical phenotype, biology, and prognosis compared with patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HF-REF) and those with HF with preserved ejection fraction (HF-PEF).The Penn Heart Failure Study (PHFS) is a prospective cohort of 1821 chronic HF patients recruited from tertiary HF clinics. Participants were divided into 3 categories based on echocardiograms: HF-REF if EF was <50%, HF-PEF if EF was consistently ?50%, and HF-Recovered if EF on enrollment in PHFS was ?50% but prior EF was <50%. A significant portion of HF-Recovered patients had an abnormal biomarker profile at baseline, including 44% with detectable troponin I, although in comparison, median levels of brain natriuretic factor, soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase receptor-1, troponin I, and creatinine were greater in HF-REF and HF-PEF patients. In unadjusted Cox models over a maximum follow-up of 8.9 years, the hazard ratio for death, transplantation, or ventricular assist device placement in HF-REF patients was 4.1 (95% confidence interval, 2.4-6.8; P<0.001) and in HF-PEF patients was 2.3 (95% confidence interval, 1.2-4.5; P=0.013) compared with HF-Recovered patients. The unadjusted hazard ratio for cardiac hospitalization in HF-REF patients was 2.0 (95% confidence interval, 1.5-2.7; P<0.001) and in HF-PEF patients was 1.3 (95% confidence interval, 0.90-2.0; P=0.15) compared with HF-Recovered patients. Results were similar in adjusted models.HF-Recovered is associated with a better biomarker profile and event-free survival than HF-REF and HF-PEF. However, these patients still have abnormalities in biomarkers and experience a significant number of HF hospitalizations, suggesting persistent HF risk.

SUBMITTER: Basuray A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4053508 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Heart failure with recovered ejection fraction: clinical description, biomarkers, and outcomes.

Basuray Anupam A French Benjamin B Ky Bonnie B Vorovich Esther E Olt Caroline C Sweitzer Nancy K NK Cappola Thomas P TP Fang James C JC

Circulation 20140505 23

<h4>Background</h4>We hypothesized that patients with heart failure (HF) who recover left ventricular function (HF-Recovered) have a distinct clinical phenotype, biology, and prognosis compared with patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HF-REF) and those with HF with preserved ejection fraction (HF-PEF).<h4>Methods and results</h4>The Penn Heart Failure Study (PHFS) is a prospective cohort of 1821 chronic HF patients recruited from tertiary HF clinics. Participants were divided into 3 ...[more]

PMID: 24799515

Similar Datasets

Project description:Evidence-based therapies for heart failure (HF) differ significantly according to left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). However, few data are available on the phenotype and prognosis of patients with HF with midrange LVEF of 40% to 55%, and the impact of recovered systolic function on the clinical features, functional capacity, and outcomes of this population is not known.We studied 944 patients with HF who underwent clinically indicated cardiopulmonary exercise testing. The study population was categorized according to LVEF as follows: HF with reduced LVEF (HFrEF; LVEF<40%; n=620); HF with midrange ejection fraction and no recovered ejection fraction (LVEF was consistent between 40% and 55%; n=107); HF with recovered midrange ejection fraction (LVEF, 40%-55% but previous LVEF<40%; n=170); and HF with preserved LVEF (HFpEF; LVEF>55%; n=47). HF with midrange ejection fraction and no recovered ejection fraction and HF with recovered midrange ejection fraction had similar clinical characteristics, which were intermediate between those of HFrEF and HFpEF, and comparable values of predicted peak oxygen consumption and minute-ventilation/carbon dioxide production slope, which were better than HFrEF and similar to HFpEF. After a median of 4.4 (2.9-5.7) years, there were 253 composite events (death, left ventricular assistant device implantation, or transplantation). In multivariable Cox-regression analysis, HF with recovered midrange ejection fraction had lower risk of composite events than HFrEF (hazard ratio, 0.25; 95% confidence interval, 0.13-0.47) and HF with midrange ejection fraction and no recovered ejection fraction (hazard ratio, 0.31; 95% confidence interval, 0.15-0.67), and similar prognosis when compared with HFpEF. In contrast, HF with midrange ejection fraction and no recovered ejection fraction tended to show intermediate risk of outcomes in comparison with HFpEF and HFrEF, albeit not reaching statistical significance in fully adjusted analyses.Patients with HF with midrange LVEF demonstrate a distinct clinical profile from HFpEF and HFrEF patients, with objective measures of functional capacity similar to HFpEF. Within the midrange LVEF HF population, recovered systolic function is a marker of more favorable prognosis.

Project description:ImportancePatients categorized as having heart failure (HF) with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in the midrange between 40% and 50% (HFmrEF) are known to be at increased risk of future events. Although patients can transition into the midrange through either improvement or deterioration in their LVEF, there is limited information available assessing the association of directional change in LVEF with future events. Understanding the association between change in LVEF and the clinical course of patients with HFmrEF would be of value in guiding management strategies.ObjectiveTo determine whether risk of clinical events experienced by patients with HFmrEF varies according to whether LVEF improved or deteriorated into the range of 40% to 50% from previous measurements.Design, setting, and participantsIn this retrospective cohort study, patients were identified from the electronic health records at the UC San Diego Health System who had an LVEF measured between 40% and 50% on transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) performed during the calendar year of 2015 and who also had at least 1 prior TTE for comparison. The clinical course of these patients was then followed from the time of the index TTE through December 2018. Data were analyzed from January to March 2019.Main outcomes and measuresThe composite of all-cause mortality and all-cause hospitalization, the composite of cardiovascular mortality and HF hospitalization, and each of the individual components.ResultsOf the 448 patients who were identified with HFmrEF, 278 (62.1%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 67.4 (9.7) years. Left ventricular ejection fraction improved from less than 40% in 157 patients (35.0%), deteriorated from greater than 50% in 224 patients (50.0%), and remained between 40% and 50% over time in 67 patients (15.0%). Compared with patients whose LVEF improved from less than 40% to midrange levels, patients whose LVEF deteriorated from greater than 50% had higher risk of all-cause mortality and hospitalization (hazard ratio, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.10-1.82; P = .03) and of cardiovascular mortality and HF hospitalization (hazard ratio, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.08-2.50; P = .02), and these differences persisted after multivariable analysis. Outcomes did not differ significantly between patients whose LVEF improved and those in whom it remained stable.Conclusion and relevanceIn a cohort of patients with HFmrEF from a large academic medical center, the clinical course was strongly influenced by the directional change in LVEF from prior study. Patients whose LVEF deteriorated into midrange levels experienced a significantly higher risk of adverse clinical events than patients whose LVEF had improved. These results suggest that directional change in LVEF from prior measurements should be considered when devising management strategies for patients with HFmrEF.

Project description:BackgroundGuideline recommendations for the treatment of heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) derive from small subgroups in post-hoc analyses of randomized trials.ObjectivesWe investigated predictors of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors/angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (RASI/ARNI) and beta-blockers use, and the associations between these medications and mortality/morbidity in a large real-world cohort with HFmrEF.Methods and resultsPatients with HFmrEF (EF 40-49%) from the Swedish HF Registry were included. The associations between medications and cardiovascular (CV) mortality/HF hospitalization (HFH), and all-cause mortality were assessed through Cox regressions in a 1:1 propensity score-matched cohort. A positive control analysis was performed in patients with EF < 40%, while a negative control outcome analysis had cancer-related hospitalization as endpoint. Of 12 421 patients with HFmrEF, 84% received RASI/ARNI and 88% beta-blockers. Shared-independent predictors of RASI/ARNI and beta-blockers use were younger age, being an outpatient, follow-up in specialty care, and hypertension. In the matched cohorts, use of both RASI/ARNI and beta-blocker use was separately associated with lower risk of CV mortality/HFH [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.83-0.98 and HR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.74-0.90, respectively] and of all-cause mortality (HR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.69-0.81 and HR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.72-0.87, respectively). Results were consistent at the positive control analysis, and there were no associations between treatment use and the negative control outcome.ConclusionsRASI/ARNI and beta-blockers were extensively used in this large real-world cohort with HFmrEF. Their use was safe since associated with lower mortality and morbidity. Our findings confirm the real-world evidence from previous post-hoc analyses of trials, and represent a further call for implementing guideline recommendations.

Dataset Information

Heart failure with recovered ejection fraction: clinical description, biomarkers, and outcomes.

Publications

Heart failure with recovered ejection fraction: clinical description, biomarkers, and outcomes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets